2010-02-15 TSC Call Minutes

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, February 15, 2010 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, UTC -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/165215206
GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas

Agenda

Apologies

• Woody Beeler
• Charlie Mead
• Ravi Natarajan
• Gregg Seppala

Meeting Admin

Meeting Attendance - :

At	Name	Affiliation	Email Address
x	Calvin Beebe	HL7 SSD SD	cbeebe@mayo.edu
x	Bob Dolin	HL7 Chair	bobdolin@gmail.com
x	Austin Kreisler	HL7 DESD	austin.j.kreisler@saic.com
x	Lynn Laakso (scribe, non-voting)	HL7 HQ	lynn@hl7.org
x (1st 15 mins)	Ken McCaslin	HL7 TSS SD	Kenneth.H.McCaslin@QuestDiagnostics.com
x	Charlie McCay (chair)	HL7 TSC Chair	charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk
x	John Quinn	HL7 CTO	jquinn@hl7.org
x	Helen Stevens	HL7 TSS SD Alternate	helen.stevens@shaw.ca
x	Ed Tripp	HL7 DESD Alternate	Edward.tripp@estripp.com
x	D. Mead Walker	HL7 FTSD Alternate	dmead@comcast.net

1. Introduction of Visitors (including declaration of interests) - none
2. Accept Agenda – accepted by general consent
3. Approve Minutes from 2010-02-08_TSC_Call_Minutes accepted by general consent
4. Review action items –
   • Review Decision Making Practices, TSC_SWOT_and_three_year_plan
     • Helen has some comments to review with Lynn. Categorization of observers and guests was suggested. Calvin asked if there was a precedent? Helen notes the Board has such a provision and the International council is looking at it, as well. Ken identified issues with losing timeliness of agenda with additional attendees speaking up on a subject. If there are invited guests to speak on a topic to represent viewpoints they should be recognized but not necessarily just observers that speak up. Mead notes the chair should be able and empowered to limit discussion by observers, but they should feel they are able to attend. John adds that if individuals wish to consistently participating in TSC meetings they should run for steering division chair. Action Item: Helen and Lynn will review board DMP wording.
     • Section 3 chair to make attempt to ensure parties are aware of topics. Charlie suggests we should be more explicit how we publish our agendas. Helen to work with Lynn on that as well. She has some other minor tweaks. Review again next week.
     • SWOT and three-year plan: do we place our projects on Project Insight? Are all of those identified as three-year plans appropriate for Project Insight or are they ongoing goals better suited for mission and charter. HL7 Quality Plan makes sense as a project; Lynn can start work with John on a scope statement; discuss further on Friday call. Linkage between work group plans and strategic plan, as TSC contribution to Roadmap, should be on the list. Ed notes it is meager compared with what we ask the work groups to do with adding some dates; Helen suggests we name it a three-year plan overview? Take three-year plan off the docket today and come back with suggestions off the list for next week.
     • Motion: Approve SWOTs; Helen moved and Calvin seconded to approve the SWOTs
       • Vote: approved by unanimous consent.
   • Articles needed for Newsletter; Chair, FTSD, SSD SD, CTO, ArB/SAIF.

Standing Committee Reports/Approvals

1. CEO Report – none available
2. CTO Report - Meeting coming up in D.C. on terminology advisory workgroup under standards advisory panel. Bob presenting for HL7, John for SCO; a number of groups asked to attend. Focus on how to map and publish terminologies in this country. Chaired by Stan Huff, Jamie Ferguson of Kaiser, and Chris Chute. Week after next is HIMSS.
3. ArB Report – not available
4. Affiliates Report – not available
5. Domain Experts – vote underway on project scope to wrap up this week.
6. Foundation & Technology –
   • Postponed Request to approve project scope statement for the SOA WG's HSSP SOA Service Ontology, at TSC Tracker # 1435
     • see emailed Statement of Position: from listserv (must be member of TSCAdmins and log in)
     • postpone vote to entertain ArB comments.
   • Motion: Approve Project Approval request for Vocabulary Syntax Binding (ICWG of FTSD) at TSC Tracker # 1447. Helen sent comments to the committee not reflected here. Use of term guidelines in title and sections 2 and 4, versus declaring rules. If so, strike the term guidelines and use ‘rules’ consistently if this is to be a normative standard. Mead noted he did not see her comments but had not heard from Vocabulary WG. He will follow up with them. Austin asks if the rules will be universal or realm localized. Helen notes the rules are part of the refinement and localization standard so will govern how those localizations are constrained. Helen moves with amendments second by Mead;
     • 'Vote: unanimously passed.
   • Motion: Approve Request to approve out-of-cycle meeting for RIMBAA on November 4th in London per TSC Tracker #1401.
     • Vote:Unanimously approved
7. Structure & Semantic Design –
   • Motion: Approve Request to publish DSTU for Structured Documents, eMeasure: Representation of the Health Quality Measures Format (HQMF), at TSC Tracker # 1462.
     • Question on the unresolved negatives, if they were controversial. Bob has joined the call and adds that they are lingering based on someone else’s comments who has withdrawn their negatives. How can we better represent those that are block votes, five persons voting in reference to a single other person’s negative votes, Helen asks? Austin notes that with a DSTU there is not a requirement to resolve negatives. Those that have not withdrawn have not contested or persisted their negative.
     • Motion unanimously passed.
   • Calvin notes that we should update the form to indicate initial negative votes and final negative or unresolved or non-persuasive. Austin thinks this is raising the bar on DSTUs, which should be changed in the GOM. Helen doesn’t wish to raise the bar but to expose issues that are not being addressed, say a negative that would be an impediment to implementation. Austin notes if you have questions on the disposition of the votes it is available to review on the ballot site and we can defer a vote for a week to give those with questions more time to review. Charlie notes we should look at this as part of the quality plan.
8. Technical & Support Services – nothing to report.
9. WGM planning:
   • new standing agenda item
   • WG not meeting:
     1. Anatomic Pathology (AP)
     2. Attachments (ASIG)
     3. Generation of Anesthesia Standards (GAS)
     4. Child Health
     5. Clinical Context Management (CCOW)
     6. Clinical Decision Support (CDS)
     7. Emergency Care (EC)
     8. Financial Management (FM)
     9. Health Care Devices (DEV)
     10. Imaging Integration (II)
     11. Outreach Committee for Clinical Research (OCCR)
   • Noted that many are clinical groups. Austin is concerned so many are from DESD. With clinical groups not meeting the need for OCCR may be higher for a place for clinical folks to go. RCRIM and CIC are still meeting. Ed noted there was not quorum in Phoenix. Is the CIC doing anything to reach out to people to encourage them to meet? Are they not meeting because they are small or are they small because they’re not conducting meetings, asks Helen. Charlie says as the TSC we should track this, especially coming up on Kyoto many committees cancelled that had initially indicated they would use room space. If the committees are realm-specific perhaps the WG charter should change or aggregate/combine with others. If not CIC, who would follow up with these groups? Austin thinks most of these are not attending because the co-chairs cannot attend. Calvin notes we should be identifying from the meeting minutes the number of attendees for each WG at WGM not just the number subscribed to the listserv.
   • Chairs of many groups are largely academic, not sponsored by large corporations and might not afford to go. Do we ask CIC to see how they can support members to attend? Available time has elapsed. Will be on next week’s agenda as well. Calvin notes it sounds like a project.

Adjourned 12:01pm